An open letter to Cardinal Vincent Nichols regarding Alfie Evans: “Do not abandon us to the culture of death.”

Dear Cardinal Nichols,

I read your statement on the Alfie Evans case with extreme sadness and disbelief. I felt that you sided with the culture of death that is so prevalent in our society today, rather than standing up for Gospel values of life, hope, love and mercy. In this letter, I want to explore some of the things you said, and also try to get to the root of why you took the hospitals side, rather than that of Alfie and his parents.

You said: “Wisdom enables us to make decisions based on full information, and many people have taken a stand on Alfie’s case in recent weeks who didn’t have such information and didn’t serve the good of this child…” I can only assume from this statement that you had more medical and legal information available to you than the public had?

Did you know about the horrendous neglect Alfie was experiencing at the hospital?

Capture

31154084_857280191126962_4180918575508226048_n30762840_857280184460296_2962046593940848640_n

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have spoken to several parents who have had, and are still having terrible experiences at Alder Hey. Alder Hey has one of the worst reputations of any hospital I have ever come across. As a Liverpool boy yourself, I would have thought you would be well informed on the reputation of this hospital. And even If you weren’t, Bishop McMahon and his Auxiliary Bishop Thomas Williams live only 8 miles from Alder Hey. It would be difficult for them to claim they were unaware of what was going on at their local hospital.

Capture3

31171540_857371127784535_3087199849297215488_n31117809_857373677784280_4497372886863970304_n

These pictures of Alfie have been shared over 22k times on social media. Didn’t any of your advisors alert you to them? Did you not know the only reason Alfie was given oxygen and food a whole day after he had been extubated was because his father Tom threatened a complaint, since the death protocol approved by Judge Hayden spoke neither of deprivation of oxygen nor of suspension of nutrition? Did you really not know about any of this? I have spoken to people who were in the courtroom when Alfie was given his death sentence, and they have told me that they have never had such a close and harrowing encounter with the culture of death.

In actual fact I sincerely hope you were not correctly informed of the situation at Alder Hey, because if you were informed, and you still chose to support it, that would be a far greater and more disturbing problem.

What about the scandal at Alder Hey in 1999, when organs were removed from babies who died at the hospital. Hospital staff also kept and stored 400 foetuses collected from hospitals around the north west of England. Did you not know about this?

And then there was the scandal of 2003 when Alder hey removed 5 year old Amy Enright’s thymus gland during an operation when they treated her for a defective heart. Her parents found out that her thymus gland had been “commercially bartered or sold” by the hospital in exchange for hospital equipment with a pharmaceutical company. Alder Hey removed and sold a body part from a living patient. Did you not know about this either?

This was all headline news over several decades, which leads me to believe that you must have been aware of Alder Hey’s reputation.

Capture1

Were you aware of how badly the family were being treated by the hospital? They would not even give Alfie’s mum a couch to sleep on during the last few days of Alfie’s life. His parents had to sleep on the hospital floor next to their dying child.

Did the hospital chaplain not report this information back to you or to Archbishop McMahon? Archbishop McMahon said “I am grateful for the medical and chaplaincy care which Alfie is receiving… I know that they are doing everything that his humanly possible.” He then stressed that the hospital’s chaplaincy team have offered pastoral support to Alfie’s family and staff at the hospital since the child was admitted in December 2016, so I would have imagined they would have got to know the family very well indeed, right? Yet the diocese did not even realise Tom and Alfie Evans were both Catholic – a fact which was emphasised in the February judgment and had therefore been well known for two months. How did the hospital chaplain manage to miss this basic fact if the family had been there since December 2016?

It seems to me that that family were not being supported by the chaplain or by the diocese. That is why the Italian priest came to minister to them and to Alfie in their time of great need. And why was this priest then suddenly called back to his parish after a firm phone call to those in charge of him? I guess once he was out of the way, the Liverpool chaplain could then offer the family much more politically correct diocesan approved support and finally be seen to be doing their job.

Thomas williams

Auxiliary Bishop of Liverpool Diocese Thomas Williams.  Chairman of the Healthcare Reference Group of the Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales.

Who is in charge of hospital Chaplaincy in England and wales anyway? Would that be Archbishop McMahons Auxillary Bishop Thomas Williams? He was the one who reportedly wrote the first official statement by Liverpool diocese on the Alfie case because Archbishop McMahon was away in Rome at the time. He also happens to be the current Chairman of the Healthcare Reference Group of the Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, so that would put him in charge of hospital chaplaincy I guess? Was he not aware of what was going on at Alder Hey?

Forgive me for saying so, but if the Chairman of the Healthcare Reference Group of the Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales does not know what is going on in his own local hospital, especially during a high profile case, then I would have to question his ability to carry out his role effectively. But that would be giving him the benefit of the doubt. I think it is more likely that he was well aware of what goes on at Alder Hey, just like Archbishop McMahon knows and you know, and you are all completely on board with it. And that is the scariest thing of all.

Archbishop McMahon of Liverpool diocese.

Archbishop McMahon of Liverpool diocese.

The reason I say this is because you told the Polish Bishops last week that “When we discuss the Church’s doctrine here (UK), we must often construct a dialogue on arguments about society’s common good.”  Now for someone who said a few moments before, that “Unfortunately, there were also some who used the (Alfie) situation for political aims.” this seems like a very political thing to say. It sounds like to me that you are trying to fit into the politically correct narrative of UK politics. Is this the case? If it is then we really are all in trouble.

Your comments seem to suggest that you felt that Alfie Evans’ death was in his best interests and the interest of society. The “experts” no doubt informed you that it was. But what do you regard as being “society’s’ common good”?

You are a much more educated person that I am, so I am sure you are fully informed on the fact that society has had a paradigm shift from classical medical ethics to modern Bioethics over the last 50 years or so. There has been a growth in debate over problems pertaining to medical ethical practice. Doctors are no longer finding solutions to these problems in the Hippocratic ethical model. A new set of modern values are emerging – namely, utilitarianism.

Untitled-1

Is this what you meant by “society’s’ common good”?

The British medical system and courts determined that Alfie had to die because of the working assumption that death is preferable to life for disabled people. This utilitarian concept is why you felt that it was in Alfie’s best interests that he should die. I say this because you criticised those trying to save Alfie stating that they “didn’t serve the good of this child”.

It is becoming increasingly clear that you do not oppose this utilitarian ethical ideology.

I remember in 2013 when a group of senior Catholic doctors said that your Bishops’ conference report about the Liverpool Care Pathway (LCP) (known in Catholic circles as the Liverpool Death Pathway) “borders on the disingenuous” adding that it “goes to extreme lengths to align support for the LCP with Catholic teaching”. The report also said that the LCP is not ‘inherently unethical’ but has been ‘badly implemented’. Why were you so keen to try to align a programme of euthanasia with Catholic teaching?

Cardinal Nichols, this is the culture of death, and you are supporting it.

Cardinal Vincent Nichols.

Cardinal Vincent Nichols.

You also said “It’s very hard to act in a child’s best interest when this isn’t always as the parents would wish – and this is why a court must decide what’s best not for the parents, but for the child.” This is truly one of the most disturbing things I have ever heard a Cardinal say. How is it possible that a Catholic Cardinal can side with those who have stripped the parents of all their authority, so they can legally end their child’s life?

As a mother of 3 children, I can now see you have no desire to defend my rights as a parent, which are being further and further eroded away by the state. It is becoming more and more apparent that you were quite happy to sacrifice Alfie Evans and his parents on the altar of political correctness rather than stand up to an increasingly totalitarian state.

People all over the UK are now having conversations about the amount of power the state now holds over the people. The time has come where you need to decide whether it is any longer appropriate for you to continue trying to fit in with the state, or whether it is time to take a stand against it. You can’t do both, and you can’t do nothing.

Capture2

With the deepest respect, may I remind you that Christianity is, and has always been counter cultural. Jesus was counter cultural.

Your comment “When we discuss the Church’s doctrine here (UK), we must often construct a dialogue on arguments about society’s common good.”  Sounds to me like you are suggesting that Church doctrine should bend to fit the politically correct utilitarian narrative. This would involve watering down and compromising Catholic doctrine, or worse still, twisting and distorting it to fit the PC narrative. Whilst this approach has kept you in good stead with the establishment, the consequence is that you have been proclaiming a version of the Gospel that is, at its heart, compromised.

I believe this compromised approach to the Gospel has contributed massively to the current lack of vocations and falling numbers of practising Catholics in the UK.

It is time to decide where your heart really lies. If you decide to take a stand against the state, you will lose your powerful friends in the establishment, and become unpopular in secular circles. You may no longer get asked to be the key-note speaker at high profile events and society dinners. You will lose your social status among Britain’s elites. But you will remain faithful to Christ.

If you decide to continue compromising the faith in order to fit in with the modern values of secularism and utilitarianism, you will remain popular with your powerful friends but you will cause further harm to the Church and to society. With respect, I must remind you that your ambition, popularity and your career come second to your vocation as servant of Christ and the Church.

My dear Cardinal, remaining faithful to the Gospel in the UK has cost me dearly. I have lost friends and even family members. I lost my wedding cake business to gay marriage. But I am willing to suffer, because I love God and He is good. I hope you are willing to suffer too.

Tom and Alfie Evans.

Tom and Alfie Evans.

If you truly were not aware of things I have written about Alfie in this letter, then I’m sure you will agree that a statement of clarity, or perhaps even an apology to the family for your previous statement would not go a miss.

But if you did know about all these things, and you were willing to turn a blind eye to parents being stripped of their authority so the state could murder their child, then I beg you Cardinal Nichols, to remember who you are. You are here as God’s servant, to lead the people of the UK in the fight against this great evil that has infiltrated our culture and seeks to rob us of our human dignity. You are not here to compromise the faith by lying in bed with the establishment, or to focus on your own ambitions.

Forgive me for saying so, but if you are unable or unwilling to lead us in this fight, then you need to pass the baton to someone who will, because we are at crisis point.

We are all praying for you.

Yours sincerely and with great respect,

Clare Short.

 

Sources:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/lancashire/3034057.stm  http://catholicherald.co.uk/news/2013/05/08/doctors-criticise-bishops-report-into-liverpool-care-pathway/   http://www.thetablet.co.uk/news/8958/alder-hey-doing-everything-humanly-possible-to-help-alfie-says-archbishop  https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/lawyers-media-on-alfie-theyve-killed-him  http://www.thetablet.co.uk/news/8990/nichols-backs-hospital-staff-in-alfie-evans-case  http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/issues/april-27th-2018/alfie-evans-the-courts-and-the-church/   https://whatisupwiththesynod.com/index.php/2018/04/25/the-smiling-executioner-when-death-becomes-a-social-obligation/

Is Christ or Man at the centre of the Family Synod?

synod

“6I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and turning to a different gospel — 7not that there is another gospel, but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we preached to you, let him be accursed. 9As we have said before, so now I say again, If any one is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed. 10Am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? Or am I trying to please men? If I were still pleasing men, I should not be a servant of Christ. 11For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not man’s gospel. 12For I did not receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through a revelation of Jesus Christ.” –  Galatians 1:6-12

It is becoming clearer and clearer that the Bishops opinions are divided at the Family Synod.

Speaking from Rome, Voice of the Family’s British spokesperson John Smeaton said:

“There’s a clear dividing line between Synod Fathers who are clear about Catholic teaching on human sexuality, and Synod Fathers who offer confusion in their presentation of Church teaching on this and related issues.”

Irish spokesperson Patrick Buckley said:

“Some of the reported interventions in the Synod are not in accordance with Catholic teaching and yet are being released without adequate comment, resulting in confusion about church teaching.”

This is extremely concerning. Why is there confusion? Either the Bishops do not know the teachings of the church or they do know them and are deliberately deciding to go against them.

In his opening address on Monday, Cardinal Péter Erdő of Hungary argued that Humanae Vitae should be read in light of graduality. In a session with reporters at Vatican Radio Monday night, Cardinal Reinhard Marx of Munich invoked graduality as a key to helping the church develop a new way of talking about sex.

In a briefing session for reporters on Tuesday, a Vatican spokesman described graduality as among the synod’s emerging themes, and Cardinal Vincent Nichols of the UK said the idea of graduality “permits people, all of us, to take one step at a time in our search for holiness in our lives.”

In its true form I actually agree with gradualism, but being very careful to remember the cautioning words of JPII.

The last time the Vatican staged a Synod of Bishops on the family, which was almost 35 years ago in 1980, talk about gradualism was in the air, too. Pope John Paul II was sufficiently concerned about where it might lead that he included a warning in a homily he gave for the closing Mass of the synod, a line he then also dropped into the meeting’s concluding document, Familiaris Consortio.

“What is known as ‘the law of gradualness’,” John Paul said, “cannot be identified with ‘gradualness of the law’.”

What he is getting at here – and what I greatly fear might be happening at the synod right now, is that people are liable to muddy the waters between gradualism ‘we come to Christ one step at a time’ and relativism – ‘what is true for you, might not be true for me’.

And then of course there is Kasper…

Cardinal-Kasper

Kasper’s views on mercy are just plain wrong. Cardinal Kasper acknowledges that all sacramental marriages are indissoluble yet he suggests that because God is merciful it can be permitted for those living in an objectively sinful state to receive Holy Communion. This suggests that Kasper sees the divine mercy more as a ‘looking over’ or ‘forgetfulness’ of sin rather than as an eradication of sin and a profound interior renewal. This is an essentially Lutheran position which sees the justified sinner as, in Luther’s famous words, “dung covered by snow.”

The possibly twisted view of gradualism being presented here, and Kasper’s (nothing short of protestant) views on mercy have one thing in common:

‘Man’ at the centre.

This of course goes against what Pope Francis has asked young pilgrims attending World Youth Day  2013 to do: to keep Jesus at the “centre of their lives.” And against Pope Benedict’s final tweet as pope: ‘…May you always experience the joy that comes from putting Christ at the centre of your lives.’

boccaccio-boccaccino-christ-in-majesty

Not to get too apocalyptic on you but… I need to quote 675 from the CCC:

“675 Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers. The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the “mystery of iniquity” in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh.”

Now, I’m not necessarily suggesting we are on the verge of the second coming, but what I am suggesting is that we have to be incredibly vigilant of Bishops spouting religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. And any apparent solutions that allow man to glorify himself, and his own wants and desires, in place of God.

Is Christ or Man at the centre of the Family Synod?

10346539_370402133109535_5896222744849305224_n

It is becoming clearer and clearer to me that many of the problems in the church today rest on the relationship one has with Christ. So many, it seems, are having a relationship with Christ on THEIR term rather than on His. When we decide to follow Christ we are doing just that – FOLLOWING. He is in charge. The relationship does not revolve around us. The world does not revolve around us. We must not become the most important thing in our lives – He must. And once this relationship has matured and developed and we find ourselves helplessly and hopelessly in love with Christ, we finding ourselves wanting to give more to him. We are able to understand and accept the doctrine and the rules of the church because within the context of a loving relationship with Christ – they make sense.

Why is no-one at the synod saying this?

Sources:

http://voiceofthefamily.info/wordpress/?p=316

http://www.americancatholic.org/features/johnpaulii/transition/CardinalsKasper.asp

http://voiceofthefamily.info/wordpress/?p=296

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2013/07/26/wyd-2013-keep-christ-at-the-centre-of-your-lives-pope-tells-pilgrims/

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s2c2a7.htm